Skip to main content

tv   Charlie Rose  PBS  April 28, 2011 12:30pm-1:30pm EDT

12:30 pm
>> rose: welcome to our program. we begin with evening with an update from washington. earlier today, the white house released president obama's original long-form birth certificate. the move was an attempt by the president to bring an end to false but persistent rumors that he was born outside the yut. these were revived by donald trump. following the release of the birth certificate, president obama spoke from the white house. and he expressed his frustration that the issue dominated the news at a critic time for the country. >> two weeks agowhen the republican house had put forward a budget that will have huge consequences potentially to the country, and when i gave speech about my budget and how i
12:31 pm
lt that we needeto iest in education and infrastructure and making sure that we had a strong safety net for our seniors, even as we were closing the deficit, during that entire week, the dominant news story wasn't about these huge monaumtal choices we're going to have to make as a nation. it was about my birth certificate. >> rose: the president urged americans not to be distracted from the challenges facing the nation. >> we're not going to be able to solve our problems if we get distracted by sideshows and carnival barkers. i know that there's going to be a segment of people for which no matter what we put out, thi issue will not be put to rest. but i'm speaking to the vast majority of the american people, asell as to the press. we do not have time for this kind of silliness.
12:32 pm
we've got better stuff to do. i've got better stuff to do. we've got big problems to solve. and i'm confident we can solve them but we're going to have to focus on them. not on this. thanks very much, everybody. >> rose: also today, news of anticipated changes to the administration's national security staff. president obama will soon name c.i.a. director leon panetta as his new secretary of defense. panetta will replace robert gates who is expected to step down this summer. general david petraeus will replace panetta as director of the c.i.a.. the president is also expected to nominate veteran diplomat ryan crocker as the new u.s. ambassador to afghanistan. but first, we begin this evening by going to cairo and a conversation with mohamed elbaradei. >> when the arab world is exploding, you need to engage iraq. you need to make sure iran will be a positive force, clearly in iraq, clearly in afghanistan.
12:33 pm
syria and lebanon, gaza, and i don't understand that we still have this standoff between the iran and the u.s. i don't see any reason for it right now. in fact, i've been advising all my american colleagues and friends that-- and europeans-- now is the time to engage iran. we need to find finally a solution to the standoff between iran and the west. it's a win-win situation, and if was needed a few years ago, it is needed today more than any time before. >> rose: also this evening, actor will ferrell, and director dan rush and the new film requested everything must go ." >> when i was on "saturday night live" every host who was a dramatic actor would come through that process and say, "whew. how do you guys do this? this is awful?" and yet thrilling and rewarding in the end, usually, but, so we heard that a lot. but i think drama is just as hard.
12:34 pm
>> rose: elbaradei, feril, and rush when we continue. ♪ ♪ if you've had a coke in the last 20 years, ( screams ) you've had a hand in giving college scholarships... and support to thousands of our nation's... most promising students. ♪ ( coca-cola 5-note mnemonic ) every story needs a hero we can all root for. who beats the odds and comes out on top. but this isn't just a hollywood storyline. it's happening every day, all across america. every time a storefront opens. or the midnight oil is burned. or when someone chases a dream, not just a dollar. they are small business owners. so if you wanna root for a real hero,
12:35 pm
support small business. shop small. captioning sponsored by rose communications this is charlie rose. >> rose: it has been almost three months since the popular uprising swept president hosni mubarak from power in egypt. today, egypt is looking ahead to its first free multiparty elections this fall. while the muslim brother hood is still the strongest political
12:36 pm
organization, many parties are forming. some of egypt's most promising citizens are running for president. joining me from his home in cairo is another possible candidate dr. mohamed elbaradei from 1997 to 2009 head of the u.n.'s nuclear watchdog, international atomic energy agency. in 2005 he and the i.a.e.a. were jointly awarded the nobel peace price prize. last year he returned to cairo where he became a leading voice for political reform. he just published a memoir-- the age of deception, nuclear diplomacy in treacherous times. i am very pleased to have him back on this broadcast even though he is in cairo and i am in new york. welcome. >> thank you very much, charlie. missing being in new york. >> rose: well, as i remember you were a great sports fan from your years in new york and love the yankees and the giants. >> still am. >> rose: so tell me what is happening in egypt today? are you satisfied with the
12:37 pm
expected progress by the military council since president mubarak resigned? >> no, charlie, i'm not. i'm not fully satisfied. i think that we need to take our time to go through transition. after at least three decades of total repression, to move-- or to switch into a full-fledged democracy needs more than six months. i believe that we should start with writing a constitution that puts in place the basic values under which everybody should live by and not go directly through elections, parliament elections, as is panned now. i believe that we have first to have a constitution pinned down diverse values that establish that the state is a civil state, total equality among every citizen, every egyptian citizen,
12:38 pm
then go for presidential elections and then parliamentary elections. as you mentioned, charlie, new parties are still in the process of being established. so there is not really a level playing field. the military council wants to go very fast, like six months' time that you go to election, constitution, everything. i think that will not be the right way to go. i still don't see we should rush. other countries took a year, a year and a half two, years through transition. so i'm still-- i'm still not very satisfied, and i believe that this is key, that transition is key to put in place pillars for democracy, which we haven't seen ever before here, charlie. and we need not to rush because we do not want to-- weep to go into a completely new egypt based on democracy and hopefully social justice. >> rose: why is the military maintaining the marshal law? >> well, it's a good question. however, i see some
12:39 pm
understanding for it, charlie. security is still not the best in egypt. lots of people are buying guns. the police is not in full force in the streets. so there is some understanding at least. we didn't need it, really, for the last 30 years. but it might be needed for a couple of months. however, you need-- i don't think necessarily you need martial law. you need just to have explau order in the street and that's not yet there. that's part of the problem. you cannot really go into elections in three months' time when you don't have proper security, law and order. people are still afraid for, you know, for their life when they go down the street or thugs are still attacking people in their homes. you need first established law and order. you need then to get a national consensus where as you have said every party is going in different directions. the brotherhood, the extreme muslims, the socialists. we need, first, to build a
12:40 pm
national consensus around a constitution. then take our time for election. election should be the last-- the last part of the process. but i need first to see a constitution that makes everybody satisfied, that this is a civil state, total equality between everybody. and then go for elections. i don't understand the rush. i don't see the need for the rush. >> rose: what is meebz of communication between the people who have been in the street at tahrir square, between people like you who have-- were prominent egyptians, businessmen and other people and the military council? what is the dialogue? >> not much, charlie. i know that dialogue is ongoing on and off with the youth, but not really with other-- with other people. i had only one meeting with the military council since they came
12:41 pm
to power. i have been calling that they need to be transparent. they need to reach out. you need to share power with the civilians. it's one thing being the military, and we have full respect for the role in protecting the revolution, and underpinning, eventual leash the civil nature of the state. but as a ruler, as a political ruler right now, they need to reach out. they need to be open for citizens, and that's not really happening. it's in a way very much an opaque political process right now. the government is not fully empowered as it should be. it should be a national salvation government. so we are still going through terrible times, charlie. >> rose: what role do you want to play? >> i want badly to see egypt moving finally to the 21st century, catching up with the rest of the world, not talking about extremists, not talking about suicide bombers, but talking about science,
12:42 pm
technology, humanity. that's primarily my goal. and if i would run for president to be president, it's a means to an end. it's a means to continue what i start, moving forward into a democracy. and i will have to see how things will develop. we are doing that on a day-by-day basis right now. >> rose: so you have or you have not made a decision to run gimade a decision to run, but i made it very clear that it has to be within framework of full-fledged democratic institutions, charlie. i made it very clear i'm not going to run unless i am satisfied that this is a free and fair election. and representative election. >> rose: i had nago, ibsubpoena suwarez on from program when i was in cairo and trying to see you as well, also recently, and he said to me about president
12:43 pm
mubarak i'm sure he made mistakes but his was not all misfangz he has been a peaceful man. he never entered into war with neighbors. he never attacked any country next to us. he had a balanced relation with the u.s. so not everybody he did was bad. would you agree with that? >> well, not everybody is 100% wrong. i mean, obviously, he's done some good stuff, but i think on balance, there was a lot of-- as we now see, charlie-- lots of political corruption, economic corruption, cultural-- you know, corruption, the obscene gap between the rich and the poor, a total dictatorship,un, where people have been tortured, killed because they have different views. so on balance, i mean, i think-- i think on the bbs sheet, he has done so much that when you get 12 million egyptians going down to the streets asking for him to
12:44 pm
leave, that tells you the story of the mubarak reign. >> rose: should he be on trial? >> well, i think now, there is no other option." i think he will not be able to get away without being put on trial. he could have left, frankly, two months ago when i called and other people called for him to go in a dignified way and leave the country. but after all that came out in terz of financial corruption, political corruption,. when you see the host cabinet in prison, i think that's a foregone conclusion that he has to go through a trial. i'm not saying he will be condemned but he has to go through a due process. >> rose: and the charges will be corruption and what else? >> i think it will be corruption charlie. i don't know. the attorney general is still going through the investigation. i don't know what indictment is
12:45 pm
going to be, but whatever it is, i mean, we, as a lawyer, i want him to go through, obviously, a due process, in a democracy we have to be sure the trial will be free and fair and whatever verdict, we'll have to accept it. >> rose: some people worry-- and i know you-- these ideas are resonant with you-- that somehow this revolution that took place, the word they use is "hijacked." sometimes you think they mean the muslim brotherhood or they mean groups that might use other means to take power. do you fear that? >> well, of course i fear that. and lot of young people fear that. loss of intellectuals fear that, charlie. and that's why i'm saying don't rush for an election. establish a level playing field. if you have an election in three
12:46 pm
months' time obviously you are giving a huge advantage to the muslim brotherhood. they have to be part of the process but you have to give everybody else a fair chance to compete, to compete in terms of ideas, this terms of ideology. and that is not going to happen in three months. when you also have lack of law and order, that is not going to take us very far. i also have been calling that we need in new constitution, charlie, that the army somehow protects the civil nature of the state so the state will not be hijacked or the nature of the state will not be hijacked into a religious correction or any other direction. this is an infant democracy, and it will take us time. we will make mistakes, but we need to put in placeab institution to make sure that the democracy will go in the right direction. but i, like you and many others, fear that we need to be very, very careful during this crucial time, so-called transitional period. >> rose: in libya, in egypt, in syria-- does the united states have a role?
12:47 pm
>> well, i think the united states has to continue not just to talk the talk about rule of law, about democracy about empowering people, but walk the walk. 100% beside the people, as barack obama did at the last phase of the egyptian revolution. you know, it pains me-- and i'm sure it pains you, charlie-- to see people being slaughtered in libya, being slaughtered in syria. and it's not just the u.s. it's the whole international community. you cannot-- we established something in 2005, everybody at the u.n., every heads of state, core responsibility to protect. we have to find a way to protect nonetheless-- innocent civilians restoring freedom, social justice, and that's what's happening in syria and libya today. we are failing these people, and your answer, of course, as a superpower, to take the lead and make sure we do not continue to
12:48 pm
rig our-- hand wringing while we see innocent civilians being slaughtered. >> rose: do you think qaddafi can survive? >> i don't know. i think, again, like mubarak, he should seize the moment and leave. i think the writing is on the wall that he is not accepted any locker in libya. it is better for him to leave now, rather than, again, see-- you know, being slaughtered, being killed. i think for the sake of his people, he should leave, and if i would give him advice, i think it would be better for him as a libyan, just to say, as i was saying to mubarak at the last days of the revolution, you can come on television, say i tried. i failed. thank you, and i'm leaving. and i think that's what qaddafi should do for sake of libya, for his own sake. >> rose: what about assad in
12:49 pm
syria? >> the situation is going in a similar correction. i believe, also, the arab countries, the neighboring countries, who have been sitting on the fence, they really have to go into libya, into syria, trying to find either a political solution, ideally, by which to have an exit for both libya, for sure, and either he implements changes or leaves the country. you cannot continue a stalemate. what we have in libya right now, charlie, is a stalemate, and the stalemate ends up being more and more people getting killed, innocent civilians simply being slaughtured. and that should not be acceptable. >> rose: then that should seem to argue for the united states to do more. >> well, i will argue for the security council, international legitimacy, to do more, sure. if you need to have boots on the ground, you have boots on the ground. but don't allow a stalemate,
12:50 pm
don't allow authoritarian system to continue to kill the people who are simply fighting for their human dignity. that is unacceptable, charlie, to me at least. >> rose: it's unacceptable, so, therefore, countries around the world, at the united nations security council, the united nationsing and nato should do whatever is necessary to stop these rulers from shooting their own people. >> i believe so. i don't think they have accepted that principle of right to protect against war crimes war crimes against humanity, and these are clearly crimes against humanity. when i saw secretary-general a few weeks ago, i told him this is the first opportunity in libya to start operationalizing this concept, this important principle of international law that the international community will not stand by watching people being killed in vain. >> rose: and do you think your view represents both the
12:51 pm
majority opinion as well as and including opinion on the street? >> i think everybody is in agony to see people being slaughtered. i'm not sure they want the west to intervene. as you know, there's a lack of credibility here in this part of the world about the u.s. and the west in general. and that's why i've said, charlie, it would be much better-- it qoob, in fact, very important to have the u.n.'s blessing on it, and ideally, even if you have to intervene militarily, it should be the neighboring countries who will send troops to establish a cease-fire, until we find a political solution. but ideally, it should be the neighbors who are not doing right now what they are supposed to do-- protect even the region security, protect the humanity of their people, or their neighbors or what have you. >> rose: why is it not happening? a regional response to the same kinds of action that you find so
12:52 pm
unacceptable? on. >> well, this is the history of the arab world, charlie. i mean, this is-- you go back 20 30 years ago, we have been our own worst enemies. it is lack of trust among arab countries. it is lack of trust between people and most of the arab rulers. so it is-- yeah, i mean, it says it all. that's why people are in the streets everywhere. that's why you see, if you put it nicely, arab-- if you put it differently, tsunami going on. people have reached a point where they are saying our rulers have failed us. we need to take matters in our ob habdz. it is not acceptable that we see the whole world going forward, and we are going in the opposite direction. what happens is summarize the kind of situation we're in right now, charlie. it is going to change. it might take some time.
12:53 pm
but i think we're on the right direction. >> rose: and you believe in the end, we will look back at the arab spring and say there was a historical moment when the arab world changed? >> i think so. i think unstoppable what you have seen in europe what, you have seen in latin america. it might be more painful here. it might be more prolonged here. because of our history, but i think hopefully you and i one day would look back and say finally, we got the arab world liberated. >> rose: what role is iran playing? >> well, not-- not much right now. and that's, also, another issue, charlie. i think at this stage, when the arab world is exploding, you need to engage iran. you need to make sure iran will be a positive force. iran could be a very positive force, clearly in iraq, clearly in afghanistan, syria, lebanon.
12:54 pm
gaza. and i don't understand that we still have this standoff between iran and the u.s. i don't see any reason for it right now. in fact, i've bye-bye advising all of my american colleagues and friends that now-- and europeans-- now is the time to engage iran. we need to find finally a solution to standoff between iran and the west. it's a win-win situation, and if it was needed a few years ago, it is needed today more than any time before. >> rose: do you believe that there would be a response in iran? >> i think there would be a response. there was a response a year ago when i was still at the i.a.e.a. unfortunately it fell on the author of iranian domestic politics at that time, and when they put their act together, it was the u.s. diplomat politics where president obama got involved with the health care system, the tea party. i think there is an opportunity. i believe both iran-- at least the iranian leadership-- and the
12:55 pm
u.s. leadership are ready to engage. just we need somebody not to wait for the other to blink. i need the both of them to blink at the same time, and understand that both need each other for regional security, for global security. >> rose: that brings me to your book "the age of deception-- nuclear diplomacy in treacherous times." what is the significance of it if you look back at the history leading up to the invasion of iraq? >> well, charlie, i think if i look back, it was a war based on deception, as the name of the book is. it was based on hid logical fantasy. that iraq will be the beacon of democracy. of the middle east. that we need to punish an arab country after 9/11, and iraq was a prime target. and now we see what happened,
12:56 pm
that iraq has been pulverized that we haven't really moved one inch in moving the arab world into democracy. in fact, it happened the other way. it was the tunisians and egyptians who started their own way of indigenous democracy. you condition impose democracy from the outside. and there was no reason for that war. when i see now, charlie, almost one million iraqis loss of life. again, the way i see it, innocent civilians. when i see people still saying that it was worth it on the basis of regime change, i ask myself as a lawyer, where do you find regime change in international law? and if it was an illegal war which i believe it is-- and i know many people believe it is-- somebody should be accountable, and that's what i'm saying in part of my book, that if you want really international legitimacy, if you want international law to be respected, you have to have the
12:57 pm
same standard and not apply counsel standard. it should not be just milosevic held accountable. everybody who participated in a war, based on false information, based on deception, continue to argue that regime change is our right to do. this is not international law. this is not international security. and i argue in the book, charlie that-- that if we need to cleanse ourselves, we need to have those who have waged this war accountable, or at least investigated. the reasons behind it, the deceptions that lie-- this is very important i think if we want to look to the future. if we want to have a global security system that is sustainable, charlie. what we have right now, as i mentioned, is a global security system that is broken and needs urgently to be fixed? >> rose: you would like to see dick cheney and george bush on trial to be held accountable for
12:58 pm
the iraqi invasion? >> i'm not really interested in mentioning names. all i know, all i see was that there was a war that was waged outside of the international legalities, based on false or deceptive information, that there was weapons of mass destruction when everybody knew at that time, based on hans blinx, and my report, that there was no evidence of any weapons of mass destruction, and yet the war went ahead, when i know now that this decision was taken even before we started the inspection, then i ask that whoever was responsible for that-- ask i don't know about the political process either in the u.s. or in the kumpd u.k., but all i am saying is we need to investigate how this war was launched, how these people were slaughtered,ing and somebody has to be accountable for this war crime. i mean, i think that is as
12:59 pm
simple as i can put it. we cothat in every other country. >> rose: but you are saying that the invasion of iraq by united states and its member nations that joined the united states, was a war crime, and that people should be held accountable. well, in egypt you held accountable hosni mubarak. in libya they're holding accountable qaddafi. in syria they're holding accountable-- so do you believe that president bush and dick cheney, the vice president, and donald rumsfeld, the secretary of defense, should be held accountable in an international court for the iraqi invasion? >> it doesn't have to be an international court but there has to be a process of investigation. there has to be a due process of who is accountable for all these hundreds of thousands of life that has been pulverized, charlie, on the basis of an act of deception.
1:00 pm
yes, i'm saying that. >> rose: but as you know, other administrations in our history, including the clinton administration, have said that they believe that saddam hussein had nuclear weapons. so they, too, were deceived by erroneous information. r. >> right, and that exactly proves my point, that president bush could have been deceived by erroneous information, but should be has to be held accountable, whether intelligence, whether hose who made decisions on deceptive information, i don't know. all i am say, charlie, is somebody in the chain of command has to be held accountable, both in the u.s. and in the umpd k., and all these countries who joined in majing an illegal war that resulted in war crimes. >> rose: you suggest that three major changes in the nuclear status quo-- and this goes to the heart of nuclear proliferation and what our president is trying to do, and others-- what are those changes
1:01 pm
that you believe are necessary to ebb habs the chance of nuclear kiss armament. >> i think you really have to show a clear-cut commitment to move towards a world free from nuclear weapon, and i think barack obama should take credit for that. at least he changed narrative completely. he concluded an agreement with rusha which for the first time would reduce the number of nuclear weapons in each country below 2,000. i think that's the lowesmb has y drastic rebucks. when you see people like henry kissinger, george schultz, bill perry, "we have to listen to them. and this is, to my mind right now, is not simply because of more and more countries are able to acquire nuclear weapons because technology is out of the tube, charlie, but the greatest fear i have and many others 0 extremist groups getting a hold
1:02 pm
of a nuclear weapon and that would be the beginning of the end of our civilization. we need to show that we are taking conyeat, urgent steps, to move towards a security sthas does not depend on nuclear weapons. and one of the other important issues or respect i am advocating and have been advocating, charlie, is to get this sensitive part of nuclear program, which is the enrichment of uranium, the processing of plutonium, the materials that you need to make weapons and enable you to develop a nuclear weapon in a few months. to take that part out of snarbl control and make it under multinational control. so at least if any country attempted to develop nuclear weapons, way would not have the means. these are two very important issues. first, get enrichment-- reprocessing processes out of national control. and then make it clear to everybody that we are mug into--
1:03 pm
moving into a certain direction. a security system that is inclusive where everybody feels secure, and nobody can rely on nuclear weapons. you cannot continue, charlie, of a world with nuclear haves and have-nots. that was standbiable 20, 30 years ago. now the technology is out and now any country feels their security is threaten, there will be attempts to develop their own weapons and cece the big boys continue to have nuclear weapons and to see you have nuclear weapons you continue to have showers, prestige. look how iraq has been treat, and north korea. north korea has been treated, let us sit around the table as gentlemen and negotiate. iraq, because everybody knows it does not have this kind of weapons, was pulverized. and yet that message was not lost on many countries watching
1:04 pm
the international scene and look at the security perspective or security perception. >> rose: some would argue everybody didn't know saddam hussein didn't have weapons of mass destruction. >> that is one of the issues that needs to be investigated. that proves my point. did anybody really believe at that time that saddam hussein had any nuclear weapon or chemical or biological weapon-- but particularly nuclear weapons. we have not seen a shred of evidence from that time. the i.e.a.e. made that statement on 7th of march, 2003, and we made it unequivicably clear that there was no sled of evidence that iraq has resuscitated its nuclear weapon program. i'm not sure anybody really believed at that time that iraq had nuclear weapons. there was a lot of media hype. there was a lot of administration hype. but whether anybody really did believe that or when went to the
1:05 pm
war on a completely different presumptionion, regime change, punishing an arab country because of 9/11. we need to get to the truth. we need to dig down and establish the facts because we need to cleanse ourselves, charlie, and if we want to move forward, we need to have, again, a clean slate and learn from our mistakes, trying to bring in a security system where you and i and our grandchildren are able to live in peace and security. >> rose: are you convinced with respect that you did everything you could have done in your position at the i.a.e.a. to say not just that there was no evidence you had seen, but that you were absolutely certain that iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. >> yes, i did, i think, charlie, but we haven't-- remember, at that time, we haven't completed the process.
1:06 pm
and i said at the security council, give me a few months, and it will be an investment this peace. quote, unquote. that's exactly what i said. i could not add that time in march saying absolutely we have completed our job. we're in the middle of going through the process but, by that time we evaporate haven't seen any evidence. there is no evidence no, imnept threat. give us three monthsy and we will give you ashuious that it is free. >> rose: it's a pleasure to have you on this kbraft. mohamed elbaradei. will ferrell is here. he has a new movie coming out may 13. it is called "everything must go." it's an adaptation of raymond carvie's story, quest why don't you dance? in here is the trailer for the film. >> the company has decided to
1:07 pm
ma a change. >>'ve given 16 years of my life to thi company. >> the rest of the higher-ups wanted you to have this. that should just about cover it. >> i'll give you 10 bucks for that right there. aren't you a little young to be drinking beers? hi, are you in there? if you are, can this happen another day? hear. >> are you getting rid of your old stuff gigot frird my j my wife left me. >> if i'm honest, i saw this coming a mile away. thanks for warning me. >> we've gotten some complaints about someone loifg their lawn. >> this is my corner. i'm not leaving my stuff. >> the city of arcadia allows a property owner to hold a yard
1:08 pm
sale for no more than five consecutive days. >> i have gone thinking, do you want to work with me. >> what are you offering? >> bathrooms and cigarette breaks as required by law. >> i don'tmoke >> go. >> how much for this? >> youant to buy that? 50 cents. >> i'll give you 25 cents. >> yeah, i just can't do that. >> h about these? >> i tnk i want to hold on to them. puthem in that drawer. >> once you get rid of all that stuff, you're going to feel eat. >> i just wanted you to know i'm selling all my stuff. and it feels pretty good. >> are we friends? the other kids make jokes. they say, "you're so fat you got stuck on your toilet seat."
1:09 pm
that's mean. >> you have aed any heart, nicholas. that doesn't change. >> how much have you had to drink judge in my opinion, not enough. >> you'll have to come with me. >> i want to learn how to play baseball. >> why don't you play, so? >> black people don't play soccer,. >> whole continents of black people play soccer. >> rose: this is will ferrell second dramatic lead. joining us, also, dan rush the direct and screenwriter. i am pleased to have them back at this table. >> thank you, charlie. >> rose: nice to meet you. >> nice to meet you. >> rose: is this a film a comedy with dramatic moments or one of those draum as with comedic moments? >>ed any question. what do you think, dan? >> it was funny, when i first went in to meet will, i had a lis of questions for him, of course.
1:10 pm
which i -- >> you had questions for mr. ferrell. >> which, of course, i never got through. but the first one was do you see this as a drama with comedic moments or a comedy with kraumt moments. we were there for two minutes can talked about u.s.c. and things like that. and we were like do you think this is a comedy with dramatic moment or a drama with comedic moments. >> i felt like it was a drama with comedic moments when reading the script. >> when i didn't, but i did believe after. >> rose: so you came over to his side of things. >> watching with an audience, though, there's a lot more comedy than i ever imagined in a way. but i have to say, in terms of-- for anybody x movie i've done, even more so than "stranger than fiction" the drama in this film goes much deeper. yeah. r. >> rose: what was it about this
1:11 pm
film that brought you in? >> well, i just thought it was such a unique premise-- i had no i wasn't well versed in carver at all. and i just loved the idea of this character who has this, a very short time, lost everything. comes home to find out that he's -- >> his wife has left him. his wife has declared him a loser. >> pretty much, locked out, canceled his credit card, the car has been towed away and all of his possessions on are on the front lawn. and he basically instead of fleeing a situation that most people would probably, kind of puts a stake in the ground and says, "no, i'm gk to live on my front lawn." >> rose: it's a garage sale. >> you're gog create his own environment.
1:12 pm
you're going to use the front lawn as an added room to the house ask build a new environment and kind of figure out what he's going to do sglx when you see roles like this, are you thinking it's as nice for me as the previous film you mekzed, a chance to sort of stretch different muscles or a chance to have people see me in a different kind of place. >> absolutely. you know, i don't-- i really don't get that many opportunities like this. and even, you know, after i did "stranger than fiction" i got some nice accolades. >> rose: golden globe. >> a golden globe nomination, and yet wasn't as if the floodgates were open to get -- >> you didn't have the royal shakespeare calling up saying we have a place for you. >> king's speech was mine. this is a unique opportunity to do something different. >> rose: so why is he right for
1:13 pm
this film what does he bring to it? >> he brings -- >> other than good looks. a very fine, handsome talent. >> he does. >> to bring it with. he brings an inherent sympathy, i think, and people want to root for him. and to me that was something that was important for this character because this guy does bad things. >> rose: liking what? >> like,ly doesn't treat his wife very well. he doesn't treat other people well. >> rose: so she had a reason to dump him? >> yes. he's made a lot of mistakes. he's not a bad guy. he's the sum of his problems and his choice. i felt like with will you could actual lie do those things and not have a character who was complete irredeemable. >> rose: many people say comedy-- drama is easy compared
1:14 pm
comedy, that it's much harder too do comedy? do you believe that? >> you know, it's funny. when i was on "is the night live every host who was a dramatic actor would come through that process and say how do you guys do this? this is awful. and yet thrilling and rewarding in end, usually, but-- and so, you know, we heard that a lot. but i think drama is just as hard. >> rose: is it a different challenge? >> yeah, yeah. it's-- you know, i think i'm so used to doing qom dee that it comes-- it's second nature now. but to really kind of slow down and play something as close to yourself as you can, that's a
1:15 pm
very revealing process i'm not used to doing although i loved it. >> rose: suppose a young actor you admire came to see you and said i really want to be able to have a career in filmand theater and television. how important would it be for me to do improvisational? >> i think it's a huge thing. i think it's kind of the core-- you know, it's the single most important thing i did in hooking back, in terms of my training. and it helps-- it informs you from a comedy standpoint, as well as anything you do in drama. it's the sail sort of skill set. >> rose: this is where yore dealing with a customer at the yard sale i mentioned before. here it is. >> can i help you? >> how far? >> i'm sorry, the shoes are not for sale.
1:16 pm
they shouldn't be over with, contactly. >> how much for the chair? >> you know, it's not for sale, either. >> how much for this? >> you want to buy that? >> how much is it? >> uhm, 50 cents? r. >> i'll give you 25 cents. >>, i just can't do that. >> based on a true story. >> rose: a true story? >> yeah. a yard sale for my sister and brother-in-law toild thistic all these things you would expect to sell for a lot of money-- tv, d.v.d.s, sure-- but the things that really got money were firewire cables and bottles of gin that has this much gin.
1:17 pm
he says 75? 20? there were three shots in there. >> rose: in creating his character, nick, what are you trying to do. tell us mayou thought about. because he wasn't good to his wife, becausely sort of had a bad moment. because.... >> i had just, you know, i kind of thought about the fact that, you know, this-- i don't know. i found it relatable in the sense that, you know, at least for myself-- ask i think i'm speaking for others-- we look at our lives and we're maybe three or four steps away from being that guy sitting on the front lawn drinking beer. like why not? if there were a couple, different things that didn't go our way, we could be on the barcolounger and just go screw it. >> rose: it could happen. >> but i try to focus on just the loneliness that this guy
1:18 pm
must feel and i mean we talked a lot about the tone of this movie and how we wanted it to be as real as possible. and in playing an alcoholic, that's a tricky thing, too, so we decided we would err on. >> rose: had. >> so nick has decided he's going to stay on his lawn, and in order to do that, he has to feign having a yard sale. otherwise he will get kicked off. in mis wisdom he decides he doesn't want to do any work whatsoever so he thinks he can recruit this local kid who seems to be roaming the streets without purpose. >> how is your penmanship? >> pretty good.
1:19 pm
>> i was thinking, seegz you're not doing anything but riding your bike all day, you might want to come work for me? >> what kind of work. >> make up signs, maybe sell a couple of things. >> are you offering? >> discussing salary and responsibility up front. smart, very shart. i'm thinking four becomeans hour ago. if i have to leave, stay here and watch this stuff. i'll feed you and give you bathroom and cigarette breaks as are required by law. i don't smoke. >> rose: a character you like, dramatic conflict, or moments of great joy. >> i'll take all of those first, check those boxes. for me the movie they say love are movies that affect you, that you come out feeling different and you have a different perspective on life.
1:20 pm
whether you had a bad relationship, somebody who has a problem in your faumly, a neighbor that you're going to think about and maybe sympathize or feel better about yourself or reassess yourself. >> rose: so let me ask you this-- you're going to be in the office? upon. >> yeah, i -- >> you've done four episodes. >> four of them, two-- a couple have aired and a couple of more are coming up. >> rose: what brought this on? >> this was just sitting around with my agents. >> rose: agents, you two more than one? they work in the same agency in. >> production endorsement. no, no. that's aing big em-- >> why this? >> it was just an idea i had. >> it was your idea.
1:21 pm
>> rose: steve was leaving. >> steve was leaving ask i thought it would be fun to go into the office and sure enough they came back with, "would you really is this would you do not just one but do a whole character?" >> rose: and then did they say, "we'll pay you whatever you want?" >> no, they-- you know, it was a fine wage. ( laughter ) >> rose: i was just wondering whether the money was a big incentive. >> no, it was just a different thing for me to get to do. i don't think i've done much of episodic television at all and hadn't done a thing that would take place over the shooting of four weeks, and i loved that cast and i loved the show. so that's how it all started. >> rose: you know, they say in life you reiet the things that you didn't do rather than the things you do. do you agree with that most of the time? >> i would say so. >> rose: where do you see yourself going now? back on television doing this one-time-only episodic television. might you come back for a guest
1:22 pm
appearance on "saturday night live" for example? >> sure. i think the door is always open for me to come and guest host and do that sort of thing. getting to do a film like this was -- >> open more doors, maybe. >> hopefully. but just kind of trying to make every choice slightly varied in a way that keeps people guessing. >> rose: and you? you have decide on your next project? >> yes and no. >> rose: yes, meaning you decided and no you can't tell us what it is? >> i tend to be one of those people, the moment i start talking about things i stop working on them. somehow the creativity deflates. so-- >> but i am here to promote to hollywood the work of dan rush. >> thank you. >> rose: you're suggesting to hollywood that they should take a look at this.
1:23 pm
>> he's a taenlt and knows what he's doing and those are rare commodities. >> rose: when you work with somebody-- he said he came this with a bunch of questions-- is it in your head a bunj of questions when they're trying to talk you bo-- >> sure. >> rose: what down to know about this guy? >> i want to know how he plans to shoot the film, how manyidation he thinks it can be accomplished in. what sort of budgeting are we looking at. is there financing or -- >> do you need my help? >> but just, you know, questions that i have in my mind about the script and whether those answers seem to jive with what i would think. >> rose: do some people come to you with projects and say, "this is great. i hope you like this. this is a great script." but they haven't gotten to the financing yet because they are in their own mind congress
1:24 pm
financing on getting you in the film and will become attached --. >> yeah. >> rose: it happens all time. >> and that's something you become reluctant to, you know, kind of just jump on board. so i'm pretty-- i'm pretty strict in terms of saying yes to something. in that regard. >> rose: this film is being seen at the tribeca film festival. >> right. >> rose: now, what made the decision to do that? is this aed any place to give some visibility to a new film? >> i think it's greet. it's an independent movie, and it has its pedigree, and this will obviously be a place where a lot of people will see the movie. and just to -- >> and get talked about. >> yeah, and to be in new york way movie like this i think -- >> it's pretty exciting. >> rose: it's great. "everything must go" opens in limited release on friday may 13 directed by dan rush, one of the characters is will ferrell.
1:25 pm
it's great to see you. >> thank you very much. >> rose: thank you for joining us. we'll see you next time. captioning sponsored by rose communications captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org
1:26 pm
1:27 pm
1:28 pm
1:29 pm
left
right